Search PubMed⌕ Search

PubMed · 2395425

Students teaching students: a medical school peer tutorial programme.

Abstract

A peer tutorial programme which is available to all first- and second-year medical students has been in operation at Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine since 1972. A retrospective study of the classes of 1982, 1983 and 1984 was undertaken to assess the participation levels in the tutorial programme and to compare the participation level to available performance parameters. The analysis revealed that 54% of the first-year classes and 22% of the second-year classes participated in the peer tutorial programme. X2 analysis of the data demonstrated that the relationship between participation in the tutorial programme and performance on examinations reached statistical significance. The results suggested that an open peer tutorial programme responded to the needs, both cognitive and affective, of medical students.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

J L Schaffer, M Z Wile, R C Griggs. 1990. Students teaching students: a medical school peer tutorial programme.. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2923.1990.tb02449.x

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Conditional reliability of admissions interview ratings: extreme ratings are the most informative.

CONTEXT: Admissions interviews are unreliable and have poor predictive validity, yet are the sole measures of non-cognitive skills used by most medical school admissions departments. The low reliability may be due in part to variation in conditional reliability across the rating scale. OBJECTIVES: To describe an empirically derived estimate of conditional reliability and use it to improve the predictive validity of interview ratings. METHODS: A set of medical school interview ratings was compared to a Monte Carlo simulated set to estimate conditional reliability controlling for range restriction, response scale bias and other artefacts. This estimate was used as a weighting function to improve the predictive validity of a second set of interview ratings for predicting non-cognitive measures (USMLE Step II residuals from Step I scores). RESULTS: Compared with the simulated set, both observed sets showed more reliability at low and high rating levels than at moderate levels. Raw interview scores did not predict USMLE Step II scores after controlling for Step I performance (additional r2 = 0.001, not significant). Weighting interview ratings by estimated conditional reliability improved predictive validity (additional r2 = 0.121, P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Conditional reliability is important for understanding the psychometric properties of subjective rating scales. Weighting these measures during the admissions process would improve admissions decisions.

Education, Medical, Undergraduate↗